| |
Main
Date: 25 Sep 2006 07:54:23
From: Laura Bush murdered her boy friend
Subject: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
Said it during sunday's round. That's code for calling him a pussy and
i thought it was way out of line. The other announcer defended Toms.
|
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 09:24:00
From: EdSmithers
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
R.J. wrote:
> It was a lame comment by a has been.
If has-been means retired, okay. Lots of has-beens out there, clearly.
Me, too, I suppose. Everyone has their favorites, though, and I never
saw anyone play better in my life than Johnny Miller. I know he didn't
do it often enough or long enough - but then who decides that. But if I
had a dream foursome, I'd take him, Trevino, and Nancy Lopez all in
their primes. And I'd be on Miller's team.
Ed
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 17:31:03
From: R.J.
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
> R.J. wrote:
>
>> It was a lame comment by a has been.
>
>
> If has-been means retired, okay. Lots of has-beens out there, clearly.
> Me, too, I suppose. Everyone has their favorites, though, and I never
> saw anyone play better in my life than Johnny Miller. I know he didn't
> do it often enough or long enough - but then who decides that. But if I
> had a dream foursome, I'd take him, Trevino, and Nancy Lopez all in
> their primes. And I'd be on Miller's team.
>
> Ed
>
He is by definition - a has-been. He makes a lot of money now, pushing the
envelope in his comments on the current crop of pro's. When he crosses the
line, or says something asinine like - he's too nice - for Ryder Cup, then
I'll say how I feel. He's a loud mouth with an over inflated sense of self
worth.
I don't always disagree with him, but in my opinion he enjoys the sound of
his own voice so much that often he speaks before he actually thinks about
what he's about to say.
Miller never won a singles match in the Ryder Cup, and heading into this
weekend, Toms had a better overall record than Miller had in his Ryder Cup
appearances.
The thing is, once you bring in the worlds top players, it doesn't make
great TV for the commentators to just say "they're having a bad week" so
they come up with other stuff like "he's too nice" or "they don't want it as
much".
Someone implied that they care less because they are higher paid.
I'd argue the opposite. Once you have all the money you need, what motivates
you? Winning more money? I doubt it. Is Tiger's motivation all about a 900k
purse in Michigan, or is it about his legacy?
RJ
|
| | | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 14:20:53
From: AKA Gray Asphalt
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
This is my kick Johnny Miller week, so here goes: Do you think anyone wants
to play the Ryder Cup with Johnny Miller as captain? Well maybe Europe.
"R.J." <roleksy11@telus.net > wrote in message
news:rnURg.37368$E67.37350@clgrps13...
>
>> R.J. wrote:
>>
>>> It was a lame comment by a has been.
>>
>>
>> If has-been means retired, okay. Lots of has-beens out there, clearly.
>> Me, too, I suppose. Everyone has their favorites, though, and I never
>> saw anyone play better in my life than Johnny Miller. I know he didn't
>> do it often enough or long enough - but then who decides that. But if I
>> had a dream foursome, I'd take him, Trevino, and Nancy Lopez all in
>> their primes. And I'd be on Miller's team.
>>
>> Ed
>>
>
> He is by definition - a has-been. He makes a lot of money now, pushing the
> envelope in his comments on the current crop of pro's. When he crosses the
> line, or says something asinine like - he's too nice - for Ryder Cup, then
> I'll say how I feel. He's a loud mouth with an over inflated sense of self
> worth.
> I don't always disagree with him, but in my opinion he enjoys the sound of
> his own voice so much that often he speaks before he actually thinks about
> what he's about to say.
>
> Miller never won a singles match in the Ryder Cup, and heading into this
> weekend, Toms had a better overall record than Miller had in his Ryder Cup
> appearances.
>
> The thing is, once you bring in the worlds top players, it doesn't make
> great TV for the commentators to just say "they're having a bad week" so
> they come up with other stuff like "he's too nice" or "they don't want it
> as much".
>
> Someone implied that they care less because they are higher paid.
> I'd argue the opposite. Once you have all the money you need, what
> motivates you? Winning more money? I doubt it. Is Tiger's motivation all
> about a 900k purse in Michigan, or is it about his legacy?
>
> RJ
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 10:04:25
From: long&left
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder
|
EdSmithers wrote:
> R.J. wrote:
>
>> It was a lame comment by a has been.
>
>
> If has-been means retired, okay. Lots of has-beens out there, clearly.
> Me, too, I suppose. Everyone has their favorites, though, and I never
> saw anyone play better in my life than Johnny Miller. I know he didn't
> do it often enough or long enough - but then who decides that. But if I
> had a dream foursome, I'd take him, Trevino, and Nancy Lopez all in
> their primes. And I'd be on Miller's team.
>
> Ed
>
could I caddy for ya? I'd love to around those three!
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 14:19:17
From: AKA Gray Asphalt
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
"EdSmithers" <spirosdarlotts@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1159201440.331676.67950@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> R.J. wrote:
>
>> It was a lame comment by a has been.
>
>
> If has-been means retired, okay. Lots of has-beens out there, clearly.
> Me, too, I suppose. Everyone has their favorites, though, and I never
> saw anyone play better in my life than Johnny Miller. I know he didn't
> do it often enough or long enough - but then who decides that. But if I
> had a dream foursome, I'd take him, Trevino, and Nancy Lopez all in
> their primes. And I'd be on Miller's team.
>
> Ed
It's been said that Miller had the best round of golf ever with the 63 in
the US Open in the 70s. Was it 1973? But his prime was short and his mouth
is big and mean spirited, imo.
|
| | | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 03:05:43
From: The poster formerly known as Colleyville Alan
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
"AKA Gray Asphalt" <goodidea1950@hotmail.spam.com > wrote in message
news:mQXRg.498$v43.456@fed1read02...
>
> "EdSmithers" <spirosdarlotts@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1159201440.331676.67950@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> R.J. wrote:
>>
>>> It was a lame comment by a has been.
>>
>>
>> If has-been means retired, okay. Lots of has-beens out there, clearly.
>> Me, too, I suppose. Everyone has their favorites, though, and I never
>> saw anyone play better in my life than Johnny Miller. I know he didn't
>> do it often enough or long enough - but then who decides that. But if I
>> had a dream foursome, I'd take him, Trevino, and Nancy Lopez all in
>> their primes. And I'd be on Miller's team.
>>
>> Ed
>
> It's been said that Miller had the best round of golf ever with the 63 in
> the US Open in the 70s. Was it 1973? But his prime was short and his mouth
> is big and mean spirited, imo.
Yep - 1973
The World Golf Hall of Fame says: "In golf's modern era, it's commonly
understood that no player has ever achieved the brief but memorable
brilliance of Johnny Miller. ... (In 1974-75) Miller hit the ball
consistently closer to the flag than any player in history. At his best,
Miller's game was marked by incredibly aggressive and equally accurate iron
play."
In 1975 he won the Phoenix Open by the largest margin ever, 14
He faded as his ability to sink puts went the way of the passenger pigeon.
He also said that most of his wins came before the end of May - his
enthusiasm for the game waned as the season went on and he described himself
as "burnt-out" by age 29.
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 08:06:06
From: EdSmithers
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
Laura Bush murdered her boy friend wrote:
> Said it during sunday's round. That's code for calling him a pussy and
> i thought it was way out of line. The other announcer defended Toms.
Not a tough code to break. Of course Miller's right about it, and
Montgomerie proved it. Miller takes a lot of flak for telling the truth
- as he sees it. I wish every public figure (from announcers to
politicians) had the same will.
I don't agree with much of what Miller says, but I did about Toms.
What's out of line? What's in line? What should he have said?
Ed
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 15:33:42
From: R.J.
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
> Not a tough code to break. Of course Miller's right about it, and
> Montgomerie proved it. Miller takes a lot of flak for telling the truth
> - as he sees it. I wish every public figure (from announcers to
> politicians) had the same will.
>
> I don't agree with much of what Miller says, but I did about Toms.
> What's out of line? What's in line? What should he have said?
>
> Ed
>
What does it imply though? He's too nice therefor he tanks matches on
purpose out of politeness?
Phil is known as an asshole by pretty much everyone, and look how that
worked out for him.
It was a lame comment by a has been.
RJ
|
| | | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 15:42:21
From: Frank Ketchum
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
"R.J." <roleksy11@telus.net > wrote in message
news:qFSRg.20916$KA6.4604@clgrps12...
> It was a lame comment by a has been.
>
And criticized ad nauseam in an online, anonymous forum by a bunch of never
were's.
|
| | | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 14:16:55
From: AKA Gray Asphalt
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
"R.J." <roleksy11@telus.net > wrote in message
news:qFSRg.20916$KA6.4604@clgrps12...
>
>> Not a tough code to break. Of course Miller's right about it, and
>> Montgomerie proved it. Miller takes a lot of flak for telling the truth
>> - as he sees it. I wish every public figure (from announcers to
>> politicians) had the same will.
>>
>> I don't agree with much of what Miller says, but I did about Toms.
>> What's out of line? What's in line? What should he have said?
>>
>> Ed
>>
>
> What does it imply though? He's too nice therefor he tanks matches on
> purpose out of politeness?
> Phil is known as an asshole by pretty much everyone, and look how that
> worked out for him.
>
> It was a lame comment by a has been.
>
> RJ
I've never heard anyone say that Phil Michelsen is an ass hole. Spoiled and
without real motivation maybe, but an ass hole? Where did you get that? Phil
can put on the appearance of trying but he's really more interested in the
oohs and aahs for a fancy flop shot than for winning, which is his choice.
He's like a pretty frat boy who has a lot of money and sort of sits on the
couch and says hi to everyone but doesn't show up for the Saturday work
days. He buys the mops and detergent but he doesn't actually clean anything
except every once in a while when his mom is in town.
|
| | | | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 03:08:42
From: The poster formerly known as Colleyville Alan
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
"AKA Gray Asphalt" <goodidea1950@hotmail.spam.com > wrote in message
news:8OXRg.497$v43.18@fed1read02...
>
> "R.J." <roleksy11@telus.net> wrote in message
> news:qFSRg.20916$KA6.4604@clgrps12...
>>
>>> Not a tough code to break. Of course Miller's right about it, and
>>> Montgomerie proved it. Miller takes a lot of flak for telling the truth
>>> - as he sees it. I wish every public figure (from announcers to
>>> politicians) had the same will.
>>>
>>> I don't agree with much of what Miller says, but I did about Toms.
>>> What's out of line? What's in line? What should he have said?
>>>
>>> Ed
>>>
>>
>> What does it imply though? He's too nice therefor he tanks matches on
>> purpose out of politeness?
>> Phil is known as an asshole by pretty much everyone, and look how that
>> worked out for him.
>>
>> It was a lame comment by a has been.
>>
>> RJ
>
> I've never heard anyone say that Phil Michelsen is an ass hole. Spoiled
> and without real motivation maybe, but an ass hole? Where did you get
> that? Phil can put on the appearance of trying but he's really more
> interested in the oohs and aahs for a fancy flop shot than for winning,
> which is his choice.
That probably explains why he has won so few events. I also don't recall
any "fancy flop shots" at his two Masters wins - perhaps you can refresh my
memory as to the holes he went for the oohs and aahs rather than try to get
the lowest score.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 00:06:27
From: AKA Gray Asphalt
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
"The poster formerly known as Colleyville Alan" <nospam@nospam.net > wrote in
message news:_Q0Sg.58$DU3.9@tornado.texas.rr.com...
> "AKA Gray Asphalt" <goodidea1950@hotmail.spam.com> wrote in message
> news:8OXRg.497$v43.18@fed1read02...
>>
>> "R.J." <roleksy11@telus.net> wrote in message
>> news:qFSRg.20916$KA6.4604@clgrps12...
>>>
>>>> Not a tough code to break. Of course Miller's right about it, and
>>>> Montgomerie proved it. Miller takes a lot of flak for telling the truth
>>>> - as he sees it. I wish every public figure (from announcers to
>>>> politicians) had the same will.
>>>>
>>>> I don't agree with much of what Miller says, but I did about Toms.
>>>> What's out of line? What's in line? What should he have said?
>>>>
>>>> Ed
>>>>
>>>
>>> What does it imply though? He's too nice therefor he tanks matches on
>>> purpose out of politeness?
>>> Phil is known as an asshole by pretty much everyone, and look how that
>>> worked out for him.
>>>
>>> It was a lame comment by a has been.
>>>
>>> RJ
>>
>> I've never heard anyone say that Phil Michelsen is an ass hole. Spoiled
>> and without real motivation maybe, but an ass hole? Where did you get
>> that? Phil can put on the appearance of trying but he's really more
>> interested in the oohs and aahs for a fancy flop shot than for winning,
>> which is his choice.
>
> That probably explains why he has won so few events. I also don't recall
> any "fancy flop shots" at his two Masters wins - perhaps you can refresh
> my memory as to the holes he went for the oohs and aahs rather than try to
> get the lowest score.
That really is a good question. I believe the reason is that Phil does do
the right things when he's put in a position to have to without looking
stupid or revealing his lack of desire. I know this sounds like
psychological bs, and maybe or probably it is, but it really seems to me
that he just isn't interested in winning as much as he is in being popular
and nice. If true, it's not a bad thing and I really, personally don't know
how anyone gets that killer instinct that really isn't killer at all but
something about competition being the same for everyone and that's it's
really cheating the other competitiors and the crowds, if you don't give
your all ... I don't know and I'm not close to knowing ...
But watch Phil next time and see if he, maybe the guy with the most untapped
potential, really seems to be playing to win or just playing to appear to be
trying to win. I guess I can relate to someone who never had to work for
anything and knows he will never appreciate things the way someone who
really has had to and has busted his ass to acheive something.
Tomorrow I will believe the complete opposite. It's part of my illness. : -)
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 12:03:54
From: The poster formerly known as Colleyville Alan
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
"AKA Gray Asphalt" <goodidea1950@hotmail.spam.com > wrote in message
news:Rq4Sg.547$v43.503@fed1read02...
>
> "The poster formerly known as Colleyville Alan" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote
> in
snip
>>> I've never heard anyone say that Phil Michelsen is an ass hole. Spoiled
>>> and without real motivation maybe, but an ass hole? Where did you get
>>> that? Phil can put on the appearance of trying but he's really more
>>> interested in the oohs and aahs for a fancy flop shot than for winning,
>>> which is his choice.
>>
>> That probably explains why he has won so few events. I also don't recall
>> any "fancy flop shots" at his two Masters wins - perhaps you can refresh
>> my memory as to the holes he went for the oohs and aahs rather than try
>> to get the lowest score.
>
> That really is a good question. I believe the reason is that Phil does do
> the right things when he's put in a position to have to without looking
> stupid or revealing his lack of desire. I know this sounds like
> psychological bs, and maybe or probably it is, but it really seems to me
> that he just isn't interested in winning as much as he is in being popular
> and nice. If true, it's not a bad thing and I really, personally don't
> know how anyone gets that killer instinct that really isn't killer at all
> but something about competition being the same for everyone and that's
> it's really cheating the other competitiors and the crowds, if you don't
> give your all ... I don't know and I'm not close to knowing ...
>
> But watch Phil next time and see if he, maybe the guy with the most
> untapped potential, really seems to be playing to win or just playing to
> appear to be trying to win. I guess I can relate to someone who never had
> to work for anything and knows he will never appreciate things the way
> someone who really has had to and has busted his ass to acheive something.
>
> Tomorrow I will believe the complete opposite. It's part of my illness.
> : -)
He has won 29 times. Other than Tiger, Phil (and Vijay, also with 29 wins)
have more wins than any players under the age of 50. In fact, that was true
several years ago. Neither has the winning percentage of Tiger Woods, but
Phil has won 8.5% of the time.
It is true that at times he has played very aggressively and there were days
when Phil was 2 under with 8 birdies, but in the Masters (both this year and
in 2004), he played very smart. He blew the drive and 2nd shot on 18 at the
US Open, but his driver was wild all day with only 2 fairways. He played
most of the tournament in a conservative manner.
When he sticks around to shake hands or, in this year's US Open, to be part
of the ceremony for Ogilvy, some fans question his desire but I think that
is nonsense. He wants to win, but does not throw tantrums and whine about
how unfair things are. That is hardly the mark of a spoiled player.l
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 12:51:06
From: AKA Gray Asphalt
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
"The poster formerly known as Colleyville Alan" <nospam@nospam.net > wrote in
message news:KG8Sg.135$5o5.10@tornado.texas.rr.com...
> "AKA Gray Asphalt" <goodidea1950@hotmail.spam.com> wrote in message
> news:Rq4Sg.547$v43.503@fed1read02...
>>
>> "The poster formerly known as Colleyville Alan" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote
>> in
> snip
>>>> I've never heard anyone say that Phil Michelsen is an ass hole. Spoiled
>>>> and without real motivation maybe, but an ass hole? Where did you get
>>>> that? Phil can put on the appearance of trying but he's really more
>>>> interested in the oohs and aahs for a fancy flop shot than for winning,
>>>> which is his choice.
>>>
>>> That probably explains why he has won so few events. I also don't
>>> recall any "fancy flop shots" at his two Masters wins - perhaps you can
>>> refresh my memory as to the holes he went for the oohs and aahs rather
>>> than try to get the lowest score.
>>
>> That really is a good question. I believe the reason is that Phil does do
>> the right things when he's put in a position to have to without looking
>> stupid or revealing his lack of desire. I know this sounds like
>> psychological bs, and maybe or probably it is, but it really seems to me
>> that he just isn't interested in winning as much as he is in being
>> popular and nice. If true, it's not a bad thing and I really, personally
>> don't know how anyone gets that killer instinct that really isn't killer
>> at all but something about competition being the same for everyone and
>> that's it's really cheating the other competitiors and the crowds, if you
>> don't give your all ... I don't know and I'm not close to knowing ...
>>
>> But watch Phil next time and see if he, maybe the guy with the most
>> untapped potential, really seems to be playing to win or just playing to
>> appear to be trying to win. I guess I can relate to someone who never had
>> to work for anything and knows he will never appreciate things the way
>> someone who really has had to and has busted his ass to acheive
>> something.
>>
>> Tomorrow I will believe the complete opposite. It's part of my illness.
>> : -)
>
> He has won 29 times. Other than Tiger, Phil (and Vijay, also with 29
> wins) have more wins than any players under the age of 50. In fact, that
> was true several years ago. Neither has the winning percentage of Tiger
> Woods, but Phil has won 8.5% of the time.
>
> It is true that at times he has played very aggressively and there were
> days when Phil was 2 under with 8 birdies, but in the Masters (both this
> year and in 2004), he played very smart. He blew the drive and 2nd shot
> on 18 at the US Open, but his driver was wild all day with only 2
> fairways. He played most of the tournament in a conservative manner.
>
> When he sticks around to shake hands or, in this year's US Open, to be
> part of the ceremony for Ogilvy, some fans question his desire but I think
> that is nonsense. He wants to win, but does not throw tantrums and whine
> about how unfair things are. That is hardly the mark of a spoiled
> player.l
Maybe spoiled is the wrong word. He sure isn't a brat and I like him,
myself. He's one of the few golfers I've ever been around and got a chance
to talk to. But, I think he's an underacheiver and I think it may have to do
with his lack of fire, something that maybe you have to have a life where
you really compete for things, something that the rich don't usually have to
do. I wish he'd reach the kind of level that he's capable of. 29 wins is a
lot and he won a pro event as an amateur, but that just shows his potential
for being great which is measured by majors, by most people. Well maybe
Sneed is a major exception.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 00:41:41
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 12:51:06 -0700, "AKA Gray Asphalt"
<goodidea1950@hotmail.spam.com > wrote:
>lot and he won a pro event as an amateur, but that just shows his potential
>for being great which is measured by majors, by most people. Well maybe
>Sneed is a major exception.
Measuring greatness by majors started after Snead's career was mostly
over, and his record looked unreachable.
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 19:14:18
From: dsc
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
R.J. wrote:
> >> I am someone who is allowed to express an opinion. So I did.
> >
> > That's the same argument that Pitts often uses wrt Tiger. For the most
> > part RSG hasn't bought it... :)
> > It's not your opinion I am questioning or your right to have it or
> > express it. It was the perception that you kind of see it as your duty
> > or job to do so. That's where the overinflated sense of worth comes in.
> > Can you see where I'm coming from? :)
> >
>
> I bet you don't get paid to use your power of perception do you? If you do,
> you're over-paid.
> I am curious though as to why it was my post that you decided to call out
> for an expressed opinion.
It just seemed to be the pot calling the kettle black... at least JM
does get paid to make such comments. :) You and I don't. :)
>Wait, it's past...I don't care any longer.
Please not all the :)s in my posts in this thread. It is meant as light
hearted discussion... nothing else. :)
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 17:02:19
From: dsc
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
R.J. wrote:
> >> >
> >>
> >> He is by definition - a has-been. He makes a lot of money now, pushing
> >> the
> >> envelope in his comments on the current crop of pro's. When he crosses
> >> the
> >> line, or says something asinine like - he's too nice - for Ryder Cup,
> >> then
> >> I'll say how I feel. He's a loud mouth with an over inflated sense of
> >> self
> >> worth.
> >
> > I hate to say it but in this case you may displaying an overinflated
> > sense of self worth too. You act like it's your job or something? :)
> >
>
> From witnessing the soap opera that is RSG over the last several months, I
> am the last person you should be concerned has an overinflated sense of self
> worth.
>
> I am someone who is allowed to express an opinion. So I did.
That's the same argument that Pitts often uses wrt Tiger. For the most
part RSG hasn't bought it... :)
It's not your opinion I am questioning or your right to have it or
express it. It was the perception that you kind of see it as your duty
or job to do so. That's where the overinflated sense of worth comes in.
Can you see where I'm coming from? :)
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 00:40:53
From: R.J.
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
>> I am someone who is allowed to express an opinion. So I did.
>
> That's the same argument that Pitts often uses wrt Tiger. For the most
> part RSG hasn't bought it... :)
> It's not your opinion I am questioning or your right to have it or
> express it. It was the perception that you kind of see it as your duty
> or job to do so. That's where the overinflated sense of worth comes in.
> Can you see where I'm coming from? :)
>
I bet you don't get paid to use your power of perception do you? If you do,
you're over-paid.
I am curious though as to why it was my post that you decided to call out
for an expressed opinion. Wait, it's past...I don't care any longer.
RJ
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 12:41:52
From: dsc
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
R.J. wrote:
> > R.J. wrote:
> >
> >> It was a lame comment by a has been.
> >
> >
> > If has-been means retired, okay. Lots of has-beens out there, clearly.
> > Me, too, I suppose. Everyone has their favorites, though, and I never
> > saw anyone play better in my life than Johnny Miller. I know he didn't
> > do it often enough or long enough - but then who decides that. But if I
> > had a dream foursome, I'd take him, Trevino, and Nancy Lopez all in
> > their primes. And I'd be on Miller's team.
> >
> > Ed
> >
>
> He is by definition - a has-been. He makes a lot of money now, pushing the
> envelope in his comments on the current crop of pro's. When he crosses the
> line, or says something asinine like - he's too nice - for Ryder Cup, then
> I'll say how I feel. He's a loud mouth with an over inflated sense of self
> worth.
I hate to say it but in this case you may displaying an overinflated
sense of self worth too. You act like it's your job or something? :)
> I don't always disagree with him, but in my opinion he enjoys the sound of
> his own voice so much that often he speaks before he actually thinks about
> what he's about to say.
>
> Miller never won a singles match in the Ryder Cup, and heading into this
> weekend, Toms had a better overall record than Miller had in his Ryder Cup
> appearances.
>
> The thing is, once you bring in the worlds top players, it doesn't make
> great TV for the commentators to just say "they're having a bad week" so
> they come up with other stuff like "he's too nice" or "they don't want it as
> much".
>
> Someone implied that they care less because they are higher paid.
> I'd argue the opposite. Once you have all the money you need, what motivates
> you? Winning more money?
Well, for some I'm sure that's the case. I think some of them even
mentioned it (getting paid) a few cups ago... and it was then beat to
death in RMD.
>I doubt it. Is Tiger's motivation all about a 900k
> purse in Michigan, or is it about his legacy?
My guess is he is most interested in winning majors (but he's always
got his eye on the money too). There is one way to really find out...
stop paying prize money at the 4 majors and see what happens? I suspect
that most of the current crop of spoiled, over paid tour pros would
b!+(h a hole lot... but still show up on the tee. :)
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2006 23:22:10
From: R.J.
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
>> >
>>
>> He is by definition - a has-been. He makes a lot of money now, pushing
>> the
>> envelope in his comments on the current crop of pro's. When he crosses
>> the
>> line, or says something asinine like - he's too nice - for Ryder Cup,
>> then
>> I'll say how I feel. He's a loud mouth with an over inflated sense of
>> self
>> worth.
>
> I hate to say it but in this case you may displaying an overinflated
> sense of self worth too. You act like it's your job or something? :)
>
From witnessing the soap opera that is RSG over the last several months, I
am the last person you should be concerned has an overinflated sense of self
worth.
I am someone who is allowed to express an opinion. So I did.
|
| |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 05:37:34
From: greenkeeper
Subject: Re: Johnny Miller said David Toms is too nice a guy for the Ryder Cup
|
In message <KG8Sg.135$5o5.10@tornado.texas.rr.com >, The poster formerly
known as Colleyville Alan <nospam@nospam.net > writes
>"AKA Gray Asphalt" <goodidea1950@hotmail.spam.com> wrote in message
>news:Rq4Sg.547$v43.503@fed1read02...
>>
>> "The poster formerly known as Colleyville Alan" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote
>> in
>snip
>>>> I've never heard anyone say that Phil Michelsen is an ass hole. Spoiled
>>>> and without real motivation maybe, but an ass hole? Where did you get
>>>> that? Phil can put on the appearance of trying but he's really more
>>>> interested in the oohs and aahs for a fancy flop shot than for winning,
>>>> which is his choice.
>>>
>>> That probably explains why he has won so few events. I also don't recall
>>> any "fancy flop shots" at his two Masters wins - perhaps you can refresh
>>> my memory as to the holes he went for the oohs and aahs rather than try
>>> to get the lowest score.
>>
>> That really is a good question. I believe the reason is that Phil does do
>> the right things when he's put in a position to have to without looking
>> stupid or revealing his lack of desire. I know this sounds like
>> psychological bs, and maybe or probably it is, but it really seems to me
>> that he just isn't interested in winning as much as he is in being popular
>> and nice. If true, it's not a bad thing and I really, personally don't
>> know how anyone gets that killer instinct that really isn't killer at all
>> but something about competition being the same for everyone and that's
>> it's really cheating the other competitiors and the crowds, if you don't
>> give your all ... I don't know and I'm not close to knowing ...
>>
>> But watch Phil next time and see if he, maybe the guy with the most
>> untapped potential, really seems to be playing to win or just playing to
>> appear to be trying to win. I guess I can relate to someone who never had
>> to work for anything and knows he will never appreciate things the way
>> someone who really has had to and has busted his ass to acheive something.
>>
>> Tomorrow I will believe the complete opposite. It's part of my illness.
>> : -)
>
>He has won 29 times. Other than Tiger, Phil (and Vijay, also with 29 wins)
>have more wins than any players under the age of 50. In fact, that was true
>several years ago. Neither has the winning percentage of Tiger Woods, but
>Phil has won 8.5% of the time.
>
>It is true that at times he has played very aggressively and there were days
>when Phil was 2 under with 8 birdies, but in the Masters (both this year and
>in 2004), he played very smart. He blew the drive and 2nd shot on 18 at the
>US Open, but his driver was wild all day with only 2 fairways. He played
>most of the tournament in a conservative manner.
>
>When he sticks around to shake hands or, in this year's US Open, to be part
>of the ceremony for Ogilvy, some fans question his desire but I think that
>is nonsense. He wants to win, but does not throw tantrums and whine about
>how unfair things are. That is hardly the mark of a spoiled player.l
>
>
On the USPGA tour. A number of others have more wins worldwide than
those you quote.
--
alan
|
|
